BioShock Infinite's Plot and Ending are DISGRACEFUL (ALL THE SPOILERS)

If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

BioShock Infinite's Plot and Ending are DISGRACEFUL (ALL THE SPOILERS)

MASSIVE SPOILERS FOR BIOSHOCK INFINITE

Here are spoilers, taken straight from /v/.
The explanation is complicated as shit.

First of all, the premise:

Booker - a gambling addict who is approached to save a girl - Elizabeth from the flying city of Columbia in exchange of having his previous debt wiped clean.

On the flying city of Columbia, Zachary Comstock is regarded as a savior and a prophet.

Okay, so basically, there is a multiverse. Booker is also Zachary Comstock(The Prophet) in multiple parallel universes
Comstock and Booker are the same people who have been brought together in through some interdimensional passage. The difference in name comes from a deciding point in his life where he could have gotten a baptism and be reborn under a different name (which would have been Zachary Comstock).

Booker, in this new reality with his other self, sees what a horrible person Comstock is and all the hell Elizabeth is put through and decides to end him, which through Elizabeth's powers means he could kill Comstock before is he was born and save Elizabeth from all this trouble, not realizing until a little later that doing this to Comstock would do this to himself and after realizing it he goes back to this original deciding point in time where he could be been 'reborn' and decides to die there so his daughter doesn't have to go through what he put her through here and every dimension he became Comstock.

In the ending, Elizabeth reveals herself to be a time lord and takes Booker on a journey to an infinite number of lighthouses, all representing the "beginning" of some kind of journey that is always the same with slight variations. For some reason she's never told him this, even though if she had in the beginning, the whole adventure wouldn't have been necessary at all. After Booker realizes that he is just a pawn in an infinite number of similiar sequences, he decides to allow Elizabeth kill him so that he can save his daughter so that he will never live in the first place, thus also ending the life of his daughter who would have never been born, the very daughter that he was trying to save.

Then for some reason Comstock ends up being Booker, and this is a result of Booker declining or accepting a Baptism at some point in time. Booker once again allows Comstock, or rather Booker, baptize himself for some reason, thus creating another Comstock (the person he is trying to kill). Earlier (or later), Comstock buys his own daughter from himself which he sells to himself. Then a bunch of time clones show up (apparently all at the time time, did they get an invite or something?). Elizabeth(s) then start to drown Booker, who is also Comstock, without his permission, but Comstock (or rather Booker) doesn't fight it, allowing himself to die and end the cycle, instead of seeking some other more rational method of doing so.

All the events of Bioshock Infininte, BioShock 1, and Bioshock 2 are cancelled out completely, the time loop having now never existed.

What is so disgraceful about it? Sounds like good, zany, timetravelling, paradox creating, wibbly-wobbly, timey-whimey stuff. Gives those with an interest some stuff to discuss, argue about etc., yet, for those who are more interested in the game, isn't too heavy and involving and requiring of too much involvement (if it can be summarised in a couple paragraphs like that).

Also... I'm not sure you can judge a game's story from a synopsis like that, out of the game. It lacks all the context and the like. There are plenty of works of art etc. that, if you were to describe the story out of context you'd think it was terrible/crazy, and yet they work in game.

I haven't played the game, didn't say I had, or inferred that I had at all. I only played a couple hours of BioShock 1, but it didn't really grab me. I assume you have seen this ending video, and played through the whole game, to get the story, delivered through the medium and within the context of the game.

Now,while its easy to reduce something to constituent components, in practice and delivery the story may actually be really well done, and probably is because Ken Levine runs his projects well.

And why do you even go and spoil a game for yourself like that or anyone else for that matter?

The game isn't even out yet for a lot of the visitors on this forum too, so posting something like this a dick move, plus some people might take it as a joke and go on to read what your writing.

Wanker.

And if you've rushed through a Bioshock game from the midnight US launch on Steam to come and brag here, well, I feel sorry for you.

That's not how they're meant to be played.

And if you're parroting what someone else has said of the internet... why?

This forum gets worse and worse every day and right now its worse than fucking 4chan.

Nobody wants to talk about games on this forum any more, people just want to be personality on the forum and argue why they are always correct in their opinions, and most of the time without even playing the games they're talking about if that's actually what they're managing to talk about.

It's disgusting.

Fortunately the people that want to PLAY games on this forum and arrange such things are all absolutely genuinely nice people.

If there is one thing this thread has taught us: It isn't just gaming news outlets that post sensationalist titles. Hell, I wouldn't be surprised to see an article with this very title on cracked.

And while I am sure Bioshock Infinity will disappoint (it is an anticipated game, what do you expect?) I also think it is best to hold off on decisions until the game is played. ANY story can sound stupid if you take it out of context or are trying to make it sound stupid

The player wakes up on a space station full of aliens and robots. He kills a bunch of stuff after talking to the security guard. But the security guard is actually an evil AI!! The player and the AI kill a bunch more aliens until the AI tries to kill the player, but the player kills her instead. But she isn't dead and is instead in a body now!

The player is a cop for an anti-terrorism group. The player's brother ends up being a traitor. But it is a good thing because the terrorists are the good guys and the cops are an evil conspiracy! The player goes around the world to find out where the head of the conspiracy is and then goes there. But it is progressive because you have three different endings! But it sucks because nothing impacts those endings except for what button you push.

So yeah, while I suspect it is "crap", I also think HOW the story is told plays a big role.

Steam: Gundato
PSN: Gundato
If you want me on either service, I suggest PMing me here first to let me know who you are.

I haven't played the game, didn't say I had, or inferred that I had at all. I only played a couple hours of BioShock 1, but it didn't really grab me. I assume you have seen this ending video, and played through the whole game, to get the story, delivered through the medium and within the context of the game.

So, basically, you ignored the link at the end of the quote to come here and attack me, instead of actually discussing the ending.

Now,while its easy to reduce something to constituent components, in practice and delivery the story may actually be really well done, and probably is because Ken Levine runs his projects well.

And why do you even go and spoil a game for yourself like that or anyone else for that matter?

The game isn't even out yet for a lot of the visitors on this forum too, so posting something like this a dick move, plus some people might take it as a joke and go on to read what your writing.

Wanker.

And if you've rushed through a Bioshock game from the midnight US launch on Steam to come and brag here, well, I feel sorry for you.

That's not how they're meant to be played.

And if you're parroting what someone else has said of the internet... why?

This forum gets worse and worse every day and right now its worse than fucking 4chan.

Nobody wants to talk about games on this forum any more, people just want to be personality on the forum and argue why they are always correct in their opinions, and most of the time without even playing the games they're talking about if that's actually what they're managing to talk about.

It's disgusting.

Fortunately the people that want to PLAY games on this forum and arrange such things are all absolutely genuinely nice people.

So instead of addressing the issue, you cry about the state of the forums and attack other posters...

And you think the issues with these forums are people like me.

Riiiiiight.

(TIL massive repeated spoiler tags aren't enough for some people. Like this guy here who, despite the size 24 spoiler tags in the very first post, went and read it anyway. And then gets angry about it. Amazing.)

So, basically, you ignored the link at the end of the quote to come here and attack me, instead of actually discussing the ending.

This is why everyone hates you and thinks you're a shill, Unaco.

lol... You are laughable R_F. I wasn't attacking, I'm arguing against judging a game, which is made from many parts, based on an out of context synopsis of one of those parts. I don't want to discuss the ending (and I'm guessing you don't actually want to discuss it either, just whine and make out like it's the worst thing ever, and evidence of a scam by Ken Levine).

Again though, I'll ask, in the hopes that you do actually want to discuss the subject... Have you played the game and experienced the story in the way it's meant to be presented, in the context of the game?

ANY story can sound stupid if you take it out of context or are trying to make it sound stupid

You just reminded me of one of the best threads.
---
I do appreciate the warning that Bioshock Infinite is about time travel, though. I don't think I've ever actually lastingly liked a time travel story, no matter how well done -- sometimes I almost want to get into Bioshock games beyond the first demo, even though I know they are creepy and full of screaming, and it's good to have another dissuading factor to balance out the pretty architecture. =) Sort of like the song "Tell Me Something Bad About Tulsa" except with Bioshock instead of Tulsa.

People who like time paradoxes and creepy screaming might have no problems with this, though! I hope they didn't read it, so that they can enjoy those things with fresh eyes.

The Secret of Gargoyle Manor, a browser point-and-click adventure about retrieving your lost hat whatever the cost, is something you could play!

lol... You are laughable R_F. I wasn't attacking, I'm arguing against judging a game, which is made from many parts, based on an out of context synopsis of one of those parts. I don't want to discuss the ending (and I'm guessing you don't actually want to discuss it either, just whine and make out like it's the worst thing ever, and evidence of a scam by Ken Levine).

Again though, I'll ask, in the hopes that you do actually want to discuss the subject... Have you played the game and experienced the story in the way it's meant to be presented, in the context of the game?

I've watched another person play it. And if you're really going to say "DAT DONT COUNT SON", then you're on actual crack cocaine.

I've watched another person play it. And if you're really going to say "DAT DONT COUNT SON", then you're on actual crack cocaine.

I'd say it only half counts... there may be important aspects that you only really grasp through participation etc. rather than just being an observer. I could watch someone play Dark Souls, but it wouldn't have the same impact as playing it myself.